Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 83
9/5/2024, 3:11:51 AM
X
In reply to:
🇺🇸Abolish the FBI🇺🇸
@iFiddleDeeDee
·
505d
@GaryMarcus @WholeMarsBlog Is it utter nonsense that Pelosi’s husband was attacked by his gay lover? Because msm told you so?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
506d
@WholeMarsBlog Like that time when he lost 72% on X in two years?

Or the dozens of times when he wrongly predicted FSD was 12 months away? Or his predictions re fleets robotaxis by the end 2020? That covid was no big deal and would be all gone by April 2020? Or the time he implied Nancy…
Whole Mars Catalog
@WholeMarsBlog
·
506d
Elon Musk has completely lost his mind. He’s gone completely insane MAGA cult. He’s completely lost it, his tweets are all misinformation.

That’s the mainstream narrative at least. Let me propose a forbidden alternate narrative, that few even dare breathe:

What if the guy who…

The statement '@iFiddleDeeDee @WholeMarsBlog Your f_cking kidding me, right?' is a response in a thread discussing public figures and controversial topics, which constitutes public discourse. The tone is confrontational and dismissive, and the intent appears to be to express disbelief or frustration.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement uses profanity and a confrontational tone, which can be considered harmful and not conducive to respectful dialogue. This violates the principle of striving to do no harm with words and actions. [-2]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech directly, but the use of profanity and dismissive language can be seen as disrespectful, which partially violates the principle of respecting the privacy and dignity of others. [-1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue. Instead, it uses a dismissive and confrontational tone, which violates the principle of engaging in constructive criticism and avoiding personal attacks. [-2]